Council not ready to sign off on AVI, additional schools funding
Get inside the halls of Philadelphia power with PhillyClout: Inside City Hall, the blog by the Philadelphia Daily News' city hall reporters.
Council not ready to sign off on AVI, additional schools funding
Catherine Lucey
The school district may need more cash, but many City Council members today said they aren’t ready to support Mayor Nutter's proposed property reassessment plan, which would yield $94 million in additional schools funding.
“Once bitten, twice shy,” said Councilman Curtis Jones Jr., referring to a similar plea for funds from the district last year. “We got bitten last year by the notion of saving kindergarten…Now we’re proceeding, unfortunately for them, with a notion of accountability.”
The school district’s chief recovery officer Thomas Knudsen yesterday said that without the revenues anticipated with the passage of the Mayor's proposed property tax plan, it was not clear the schools could open in the fall, according to this Inquirer report. The district would still face a shortfall, even if the city provides additional funds.
Councilmembers said they understood the schools need funds, but said they wanted more information about what the money would pay for. Members also said that while they understand that the current property tax system is flawed, there are unanswered questions about how Nutter’s proposed shift to a property tax system based on market values, known as the Actual Value Initiative (AVI), would work and if there would be enough protections for vulnerable homeowners.
As Nutter has proposed it, the move to AVI would collect an additional $94 million for schools, a revenue increase that critics have labeled a “back door tax hike,” while Nutter says he is just capturing the increase in property values. Some members have said they'd like to debate the move to AVI and the additional schools funding as two separate issues.
Councilman Kenyatta Johnson said he still needed more information.
“I’m still waiting to look at all of our options. As much as I have a concern for children, I have to take into account the impact AVI has on all of my district," Johnson said.
Some Councilmembers have expressed support for the mayor’s propsosals. Councilwomen Blondell Reynolds Brown and Maria Quinones-Sanchez today had an op-ed in the Daily News, saying they support the move to AVI and the additional funding the mayor wants to collect.
Meanwhile, Councilman Mark Squilla, who has proposed delaying the move to AVI for a year, said he’d like to see more support from the state government for the schools.
“We have to put the state’s feet to the fire,” Squilla said. “The state took over the school district.”
Comment removed.
"'We have to put the state’s feet to the fire', Squilla said. 'The state took over the school district'." --- Ok. How's this? The State comes up with $50 million for this year but then as a requirement ALL PSD employees from the top to the bottom have to reapply for their jobs. Anyone who doesn't qualify is canned right there on the spot with no pension, medical, or whatever. The other money to makeup the difference has to come from Nutter and Council. They have to trim or eliminate their staff and all of the deputy mayors. psyrus
Comment removed.
Comment removed.
Oh where oh where shall the money come from? If it were a business, it could file for bankruptcy, get a bail out - Ha!, reduce the number of facilities, reduce headcount, modernize facilitites to increase efficiencies, increase revenues (taxes). Problem is that elected officials and their political appointees would have to make these decisions which are tantamount to suicide. Enter Knudsen, scare tactics, we'll all pull together at the last minute and put another band aid on it until the next crisis. boroughboy
Nutter needs to go. PhilMar
What happened to the wage tax reduction? I should have listened to my father years ago and left the city. What a disgrace this City, and this administration are. discobiscuit
This comment has been deleted. stonewall jackson
Comment removed.
Well then they better NOT support any type of 'temporary' tax to fill the black hole known as the Philadelphia School District. Those beggars @ the PSD better do whatever they have to do to make their ends meet. 40 kids in a class, transportation cuts whatever it takes. The tax payers (many of whom don't even use the schools) CANNOT keep digging into our wallets to make up for their shortfalls. Kennedy
Comment removed.
& as far as AVI being revenue neutral there's just NO WAY! There are more Philadelphians paying too little in the way of property taxes as opposed to those who are over paying. There will be, and probably should be new revenue realized. They need to roll out AVI with a reasonable millage rate. But as far as I'm concerned I'd rather see the 94 million go to a new class of police officers not down the drain to the schools. As a tax payer I feel like that would be a better return on my investment. Kennedy
Comment removed.
How about that casino revenue Since they opened in 2006 My taxes just keep going up... When am I going to see the lowered taxes.. We got sold a bill of goods... UnionsSuck
Let's just hope that it is a "accurate and fair system", And the AVI is based on the "TRUE MARKET VALUE" of today, not what it was based at three yrs ago, or based on what the market trend shows in the future!! NOW MEANS NOW, THAT'S WHAT IT SHOULD BE BASED ON!!! Dadair1
Comment removed.
I say we call the school districts bluff, and do nothing. they are trying to scare the city into giving them more cash, they can't efficiently manage. Tyrone Biggums
As dirty as it makes me feel, I have to finally agree with Council. The two issues - AVI and school funding increases - need to be treated separately. There are definite problems over at SDP, and continuing to pour money into the hole isn't helping. This would be th enew textbook definition of 'throwing good money after bad'. citylumberjack
Tax XFINITY LIVE. It is on City Owned Land. How could the City permit a BAR be built on City Owned Land as economic development. Where is the Pilot Program. Raise the PILOT program up and raise 94 million. (Payment in Leui of Taxes). NUTTER is not moving forward in the right directions. (1) Ask PILOT to come up with the money first (2) Bear down and try to collect unpaid taxes....that would be leadership solution that is positive!!!!!! Clark_Kent_SuperHero
@CleanupPhilly you always seem to have all the answers. although you keep harping on collecting the unpaid property taxes which are due the city. this seems to be you pet peeve or level of expertise. so; you're running for office when...? ihatenewyorkers- Agreed...CleanupPhilly always has a lot to say in the way of complaints but never backing it up....I wonder why...hmmmm
pepdsb
Those who are paying taxes now, will pay more under the AVI scenario. Instead of going after tax deadbeats, like the ones that had the warehouse burn down in Kensington least month, they will keep going to the same taxpayers and tell them to dig deeper. Its not the unions that are to blame for the financial mess, it is the politicians, the democrats and the republicans who are members of the most powerful unions in the land - the Republicrats! slugo
Let me go open the books, I guarantee I can make the budget work and cut out the kickbacks as well. After I cut 100 administrator jobs @ 440, that'll be $6 - $8 million recovered already. Then when redundancy is purged, I'm surre at least $30 million can be saved... solobrutha- According to the CIA Factbook, Philadelphia has a budget larger the GDPs of about 40 countries, or roughly 20% of the world. And they still can't balance a budget. verve
We need more information on the DROP... Panther78
I finally agree with Curtis Jones on something. Not one more cent in taxes. An 18% increase under Mayor Nutter is enough. The orange has been sucked dry dude. My house has gone down in value, not up as has most of Roxborough. Leave us alone. More taxes will only decrease the value further because higher taxes come with the place when you sell...which I may have to real, real soon.
The Monk
I don't understand the claim that "he is just capturing the increase in value during the run up". That is not a justification for a tax increase. The city is not entitled to any run up ever. Show me you are running your city efficiently first. Cut of 2 to 3% of spending by the city would be enough to fund the 100 million the school district is requesting.
At the same time, the union needs to agree to their give back before the city's money is necessary anyways. If the union doesn't give back the 156 million then the district is closing down.
p.e.poole
I don't understand the claim that "he is just capturing the increase in value during the run up". That is not a justification for a tax increase. The city is not entitled to any run up ever. Show me you are running your city efficiently first. Cut of 2 to 3% of spending by the city would be enough to fund the 100 million the school district is requesting.At the same time, the union needs to agree to their give back before the city's money is necessary anyways. If the union doesn't give back the 156 million then the district is closing down. (HTML deleted) p.e.poole
Curtis marvin Gaye Jones i want to man up with u anytime and anyp;ace no tax increase for ur useless schools i will start a campaign to remove u nelson van alden



Follow Chris on Twitter